However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 25, 2016, at around 00:24, the Defendant committed assault against her husband in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government CGra 201, and when the Defendant’s wife received 112 reports and received notice from her husband to arrest him/her as a current offender of the crime of assault from an slope D belonging to the Seoul Dongjak Police Station, called her husband to her due tea, and received notice from her assistant D of the Seoul Dongjak Police Station to arrest him/her as the current offender of the crime of assault, the Defendant assaulted her head when her face was taken once.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning 112 report processing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution: The crime of this case is a case in which the defendant committed an assault against a police officer in the course of performing official duties and its nature is not good in light of its circumstances, methods, etc.; circumstances that led to the crime of this case; circumstances that led to the crime of this case; the degree and result of damage; circumstances after the crime of this case; and other circumstances that led to the defendant's age, sex behavior, environment, etc. and the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case shall be determined as per the order.